Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-177"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-10-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common foreign and security policy (CFSP)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011024.8.3-177"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-10-24-Speech-3-1782
lpv:speaker	lp:Hannes Swoboda2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with South-east Europe (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Brok's report, which, as usual, is very carefully drafted, has come just at the right time, a time when we need some pointers for where the common foreign and security policy is heading. For us, 'common' means above all, and I am saying this deliberately now, that we must not have, or even give the impression of having, a board of directors issuing instructions and determining policy. 'Common' also means, and here I would support my colleague, Mr Brok, that the High Representative's duties need to be combined with those of the relevant Commissioner. 'Common' also means ensuring that we have a European Union Rapid Reaction Force as soon as possible. The policy has to be European to the extent that it clearly defines European objectives, and this means that we show solidarity with the United States of America but also insist that this solidarity is not a one-way street. If I have to read at a time like this that the United States of America is still rejecting the International Criminal Court and that Congress is even debating whether or not those who cooperate with the Criminal Court should be penalised, then this is not what I understand by developing a policy based on solidarity between the European Union and the United States. Solidarity with the United States must therefore also mean our drawing the United States' attention to those areas where it is necessary to pursue a common policy in the world community. My third and final point is that if we form alliances, in particular this alliance against terrorism, an alliance which we must and should form, we will more often find ourselves facing a contradiction or conflict between our strategic concerns on the one hand and our human rights concerns on the other. We should be under no illusion about this. Anyone who wishes to enter into an alliance, and I do, with the Soviet Union, with Russia, with China and with the Islamic States, will repeatedly encounter this contradiction. We should simply realise that we also need to make it absolutely clear to the public that this contradiction exists. We need to work towards both objectives. We should never abandon our aim of securing respect for human rights in the medium and long term when we have to form a strategic alliance, because if you support the shahs of today you will get the Ayatollah Khomeinis of tomorrow. This can happen if we do not remain vigilant and at the same time put the issue of human rights at the centre of our foreign policy."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph